I would never jump down your throat, Paco. John Edward made millions as an ambulance chasing personal injury lawyer, and would be the guy sueing Honda because a drunk ran into a tree with his 400EX, just to make a buck. He is the scum of the earth.

 

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img]
Our Founding Fathers were simply genious. The electoral collage is nescesary for each state to get fairly represented in an election. Don't say your vote doesnt mean squat! Thats so untrue, its the attitudes like that, which is why we are losing riding areas, we arent speaking up loud enough because we think we mean squat.

VOTE BUSH FOR 2004

 

[quote]
Originally posted by: EndlessMike

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img]
Our Founding Fathers were simply genious. The electoral collage is nescesary for each state to get fairly represented in an election. Don't say your vote doesnt mean squat! Thats so untrue, its the attitudes like that, which is why we are losing riding areas, we arent speaking up loud enough because we think we mean squat.
--------------------------------------
I will have to disagree with you. What about fair individual representation?? If I vote for the republican candidate in a state that is overwhelmingly democrat or vice versa and the democrate recieves the electoral vote, my vote then stands for nothing.....even if the state is on the fence 51% to 49% that would be 49% of that states population not getting fair representation.....If the system was changed to award the presidency to the candidate with the most popular vote each individual will be fairly represented.

 

[quote]
Originally posted by: Jerrydlish
This is a good point. The "Electors" of the electoral college were originally the learned men the states sent to Washington to cast the electoral votes. They had the actual right to go against the will of the people, if they saw corruption in a candidate etc. Today, they all go for one candidate from a given state, although I don't believe they HAVE to do it that way. Not completely sure though. I think the electoral votes should be more like each congressional district, rather than each state all or nothing. However, you won't see this happen, because then the Republicans would have an overwhelming advantage by for instance not always losing California in total.

 

I am afraid your wrong Jerry.

It would simply mean that you (as the slightly smaller minority) would merely get overruled on a higher level. The majority rules whether it is on a state by state basis or a popular national basis. It could still come down to a 51% 49% on the national and you would have gotten the same "say-so" as if it were 51% 49% in your state. Just because you are the minority in an election doesn't mean your vote meant nothing, just that the majority of the people felt differently and so the decision will go against your wishes. That's democracy!

~HoundDog

 

One interesting piece of info:

Do any of you know what the electoral college was originally intended to do? Elect the president, right? WRONG!! The founders of the constitution set up the electoral college to elect the primaries for the original parties. (Elect candidates FOR the presidency). The final vote of who would get the Presidency was left up to who? None other than CONGRESS. However, elections for primary candidates have since evolved to being chosen by the parties themselves and the electoral college is used for the final vote. In almost all cases, the electoral college has been nothing more than a formality. What I mean by this is, only (i think) four times in history has the electoral vote resulted in a different candidate being elected than what the popular vote indicated. Just some thoughts to chew on.

~HoundDog

 

Exactly, you can't please everyone in an election, but your vote did mean something.

 

Hound Dog is pretty savvy for a young guy. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

 

I wouldn't say I'm wrong for having a difference of opinion....and I wouldn't say you are wrong either......We just don't agree......One more thing to add....throw a legitimate 3rd party candidate (more legit than Perot) into the mix and we'll see how well this system works.

 

I miss Perot and his wacky Texas sayings.

"Now then. Everyone knows you can't milk the mule if Gramma's wearin' her green dress. Lookit this chart. See that? Okay Larry, now back to your point...."

God that guy was fun.